Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Does a lower VID mean a better chip, or doesn't it matter that much?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
April 8, 2008 10:14:29 AM

I have a Q6600 G0. I've noticed the VID as reported by CPUZ is 1.3125 which sounds like its one of the highest you could expect from a G0. I thought B3's where usually that high. So my question is does this mean that I got a CPU that needs more voltage to stay stable? If so that might mean a hotter chip and it would be harder to over clock. OR, maybe it means that the chip can handle more voltage and it's a good thing?, but I doubt that.

I read VID is the voltage Intel guarantees the chip to run stable at stock speed. So I'd think a lower VID would be better. I read somewhere that you can raise the voltage 15% beyond the VID. If that's true, then I'd be able to go to 1.509v max. I wouldn't really want to do that as it sounds high. From what most people are saying, about 1.44v to get 3.6ghz.

Does anyone have an idea of whether VID matters that much, and if it's better to be lower (or higher?) Thanks. :D 

(asus pk5-e wifi, Q6600 G0, tuniq tower, as5, ocz pc6400, antec 900)

More about : lower vid chip matter

April 8, 2008 11:11:36 PM

Yeah, I'm now leaning towards the fact that lower VID does matter. I'm sure Lupi will find more proof of this.
Related resources
April 8, 2008 11:33:32 PM

well anything low will prolong the life anyway.low temp,low voltage.........
April 9, 2008 3:21:51 AM

Thanks for the link iluvgillgill. also thanks Evilonigiri. I've read some random things here and there, but that shows more proof. I spent a lot of time trying to pick the right components and felt bad about having the highest VID, so I ordered another Q6600 and should get it by tomorrow. According to this site:

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1212904#post1...

I had a 1 in 32 chance of getting a vid of 3.125, lol. I looked at the histogram and saw that only 5 people in 158 got such a high vid in G0 stepping. So I figure I have a good chance getting a better one 2nd time around. Of course I know I could end up with another 3.125, or even a B stepping, but it's unlikely.

I have an Antec 900 case and tuniq which should be good for cooling, so I gave it a try and got the current 1.3125v vid cpu up to 3.4ghz, prime95 stable. In bios I entered 1.4375v, AND it's reported as 1.328V for the core in monitor and 1.33 in windows. The highest temp I reached for 4 cores with Antec fans on low is 138F, 58.8C, sometimes 140F, 60C. Turning case fans to max and tuniq fan to max it brought the high temp down to 126F, 52C with it saying 129F, 54C once in a while. Room temp = 69 or 70f. The load temps seem ok, I think...

Idle gave a low of 77,79,70,70 F on all 4 cores. That is 25, 26, 21,21 C.

3.4 is nice, but when I try to go up to 3.5 or 3.6ghz it fails prime95. I tried to up the voltage a little to 1.38, but it failed anyway. I might push the vcore up more, but I get the feeling that if I get stability, it will just be hot. Not that 3.6 is that much faster, but I just want to see if I can and if a lower VID chip is what allows it. If it's true, I will post results of the 2nd chip if it's a good chip :) 
April 9, 2008 7:49:05 AM

Hehe, sorry for not commenting sooner, I moved, so am on dial up till comcast gets off their a$$ and installs my high speed cable, I will be subject to dial up, and slow!

The high VID G0s will need a higher VCore raise near that 3.4, like you noticed. You are near a point where the voltage needs are not worth the gains. I have a 1.300 and it needs about 1.44-1.45 to be prime stable at 3.6, but good luck getting it stable at much more than that!

And even at 3.6, you see that the heat decides that it will make a nice little jump upwards! Just keep your eyes on it, and take it up to 1.5250! Yee Haw! That will be its rated maximum in windows, very near 1.500. You have enough VCore leverage to test and see what ya need for 3.6 and such, you just prolly wont wanna keep it there!

Now remember, the q6xxx series are rated at a 1.5 volt maximum, but thats to live through intels 3 year warranty period. They can take more, and I booted a b3 into vista at 1.8250 in the bios, on accident of course. (1.78 in windows.) So you have testing leeway if you are really interested in seeing what your quad can do.

--Lupi
April 9, 2008 10:38:41 AM

Thats ok. I know how dial up can be, and comcast can be a pain some times too. But high speed is great when it's there.

Thanks for the info on the vcore voltages Lupiron. I see what you meant about 1.525, but you're right. I wouldn't want to keep it there to gain a 2% speed advantage over 3.5ghz. However, I tried some different vcores and finally got it stable at 3.5ghz!!! And it is just on the edge of what I feel comfortable with in terms of heat/voltage. The vcore as reported in windows was set to 1.36v. I still haven't got up to 3.6ghz, but like you said, it may not be worth it. Thanks for the tip on 1.5v max though. Maybe sometime I will go a little higher. But at 3.5ghz, it seems great. Your 1.78 in windows shows it can take it, but is slighlty scary, LOL.

At 3.5ghz my high temp, running prime 95, is about 63c in a 70F degree room with Tuniq on mid speed, 1500rpm which is fairly quiet. With the Tuniq fan on low it rose up to 65C at 3.5ghz. On high it got as low as 61C. So 3.5 seems doable. At 3.4ghz with Tuniq on high it got as low as 52c to 54c. So it's about 7C higher now. So that's a jump up in temp. So I imagine 3.6ghz and 3.8 etc get much hotter, lol. But if I had a CPU with a lower VID, maybe that wouldn't that much hotter as you were pointing out in your other thread.

But, looking at this differently, none of my programs or games ever get the CPU hot. And even if they did 63c to 65c wouldn't hurt my cpu if it happened once in a rare case. Most of the time, I'm idle at temps are about 71f to 81f or just above room temp. Giving it some programs it goes up to about to between 100f to 117f (38c and 47c). I think the Tuniq Tower is pretty cool (get it? cool :lol:  ? )

So maybe leaving it at 3.5ghz is ok if I keep this chip. I do wonder what I will get in the mail today though. I hope it's a really good G0.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
April 9, 2008 12:13:14 PM

What are you going to do with your current one? I'll take it if it's free :D 

I imagine 3.5-3.6GHz is all you will be able to get out of any of the VIDs on air. Sure a lower one will help a bit, but I wouldn't expect miracles (unless it is a 1V :lol:  ).
April 9, 2008 5:40:10 PM

Hehehe, EXT64, you didnt happen to look at the screen shots from my other post, did you? My 1.2000 VID was like 51 c while runnin' prime at 3.6 @ <1.30 volts in windows. Thats alot of OC headroom past 3.6!! I just cant get my board stable! It easily boots at 4.0, but fails just as easily as it does at 3.8. But only testing.

And OCfun, you are soooo very right, its virtually impossible to reach those prime 95 testing temps under real life conditions. And all my testing never fails when I am using it for every day stuff, just while testing. There are some motherboard features I need to read up on, and I will try and get the board higher and stable.

They say that while testing, 65c is a good maximum temp. Though you'll never really reach it unless testing for it. Even at 100 % you see that some are weak, and some are power hungry! Blend vs small ffts. So if you werw to get your processors core/cores to 100%, the current requirement prolly isnt there anyways!

Let me know when ya get yer new chip!

--Lupi
April 11, 2008 9:02:44 AM

I finally had a chance to test the new cpu. Good news and bad news. The good is that the VID is 1.275 instead of my old VID of 1.325. This is 5 voltage steps down and is reasonably different. The bad is that to my surprise the chip didn't perform as well as my original 1.325vid chip. I did everything I could think of to make sure everything was the same. I even made sure the room temperature was the same according ot 2 thermometers instead of 1. I tried the fan at different speeds. I tried checking the mounting etc on the Tuniq. Nothing improved the results on the 2nd cpu other than to boost the fans up to high speed. Also whether it was set to 3.4ghz or 3.5ghz, the voltage to get it stable turned out to be exactly the same settings as the other cpu. I expected to need less, but it didn't happen.

It shows that getting a lower VID doesn't always mean a cooler or better cpu. I still feel like some people with super low VIDs may see an improvement, but the fact that my lower voltage chip produced worse results leaves me to think that getting a good chip is a more complex than just the vid. So maybe people should remember this can happen when searching for a low vid. So as it turns out, the cpu wth the lower VID and in the main stream of chips manufactured was too hot to over clock, but the cpu with the highest VID available over clocked just fine to 3.5GHZ on air. I'm fairly happy with the 1.325 vid at 3.5ghz and will probably keep it. As you said Lupiron, it will probably never get hot in normal every day use anyway. Congrats on your low VID chip that's cooler than usual. I still think my 3.5ghz on air is reasonably cool now that I've seen how bad the 2nd chip is. I should be happy with it as it's in the safe zone. Plus it will spend most of it's life near room temp anyway :)  But can you think of any more tricks I can do with the asus pk5-e Lupi? Maybe a way to get it stable at an even lower voltage? LLC tricks? I haven't played with many of the settings yet, but if you know if anything let me know. Still, I think it looks pretty good though.

And what will I do with the "current one?" with high temps. I have no clue. I think it will go in the garbage where it belongs. Either that or I will drill a hole in it and hang it in my aquarium for a decoration. I could return it and get my money back. Nah, stupid idea. Oh wait, I see you want it for free EXT64. No problem. Let me use my matter to data converter so I can zip it up and email it to you. :D 

============================
Results in prime95:

1.325vid:
3.4ghz - fan low - high temp is 139 (59c) for hours.
3.5ghz - fan low - high temp is 149 (65C), fan mid 145 (63c), ran for hours like this.

=================
1.275vid:
3.4ghz - fan low - high temp is 149 (65c), fan med - high temp is 144 (62c), about 20 mins.

3.5ghz - fan med - high temp 162 (72c) - Reached after only 6 mins. Test was halted immediately because core temp was above 71c. Retrying later with all fans in Antec 900 and Tuniq Tower to highest - high temp 151 (66c) which is pretty hot with some fan noise since it's on high.
April 11, 2008 5:07:36 PM

Uhh.. well... did you test to make sure the thing is flat? As in, it may need lapping. Several of the ones I had NEEDED lapping, or it just barely contacted the heat sink! As a matter of fact, one was sooooo bad that the whole left face of the IHS was noticeably higher than the rest!

No Joke. It took like 20 mins of filing just to get it down Where it started to wear at other parts of the IHS!! Thats way lopsided. And as you have read, intel is renown for it.

Their reasoning is that to operate at stock, you dont need anything else. That doesnt mean that the thermal dissipation is functioning properly. It just means you shouldnt really notice that its not functioning properly unless ya crank it up!

An easy test? Yank them out, clean em off, then take yer finger and apply a small amount of thermal paste over the entire IHS. (Thin layer, but covered.) Then just stick the thing to the heat sink while holding them. Press down but dont wiggle, hold it there for a few, making sure its nice and tight, then try and remove the processor from the heat sink as softly as you can, and take a peek at the heat sink. Did the whole IHS leave a thermal paste area on your heatsink?

You can judge the contact for yourself. You can tell if an area didnt make proper contact, you can see areas that are up higher than the rest of the IHS because that will contact better, leaving the paste not smeared much from where it didnt make full contact.

I have noticed some heat discrepancies between VIDs and am still working on that part. I will need some other cooling types before I can find out if thats the case. One can safely assume that since intel cant make a flat IHS, what makes you think they can have that not flat IHS fully contacting the cores?

So I bet design has something to do with it. (But the heat discrepancies are nothing like yours! I run into my weird heat problems when testing at 3.6 or higher.) Below that, they seem to remain on a pattern that the lower the VID, the cooler it is.

Now remember!! While it's hotter, that doesnt mean its performance is worse! It just means that the heat is a problem, because as it gets hotter, the VCore requirement to be stable will also go up.

Look at some of the VCore settings I have used when its cold!

Luckily for me, you need a few more chips to show a pattern!

You can also, while idling at a high speed, press firmly down on the top of your heat sink, so its pressing tighter against the IHS. Watch the temps. If it falls after a minute more than 1c, tighten it!

(I assume you did all that, but have to make sure! And 71c is still good on Intels chart. They rank 75c as hot. The forum likes to go by a 65c max to the cores because you can guess that it will last 3 years. I routinely test with cores going towards 80c. But you have to to establish a pattern after all, so that takes some testing.)

--Lupi
April 13, 2008 10:32:37 AM

I know you wanted to know for sure, so I used a razer and checked the cpu and hsf and they were very flat. What happened next is a bit strange. I put back the original cpu and for some odd reason it gained about 3 degrees c. I rechecked everything and it was running hotter. I re-applied arctic sliver to no avail. I tried pressing on the hsf too, but no luck.

I wondered if maybe the as5 needed to cure, but it didn't improve much. I then decided to lap my heat sink even though it was flat. I watched videos, read articles and made sure it was done right. After 3 hours of lapping to a shine, I got the same temps. As for performance, I meant it didn't perform as well in terms of temps.. which leads to heat, which leads to setting the clock lower.

For some reason, the 1st cpu is now unstable and crashing over and over on the original voltage for 3.4ghz. :pfff:  :(  - I was careful with it, yet it's not acting right anymore. Maybe I ruined it, but I don't see how. It's never been above 68c and never above 1.36v. It passed a 24 hour prime95 test. Now it needs more voltage?? So strange. I guess I will be returning it if I can't find the root of the problem.

As for final speed, I could go with 3.5ghz, but now my temps are even worse. So I worry that some day a program will crash into an infinite loop and heat the cpu to the prime95 level and beyond while I'm not home, or sleeping. So I will be looking for a way to make my tuniq be controlled by Asus Q-Fan. It doesn't work at this point. Or maybe another auto fan idea that could save the cpu by cranking up the fans in the event it starts going beyond 65C. -- Thanks for all the tips and info on max temps and voltages etc. :D 
April 14, 2008 6:10:57 AM

As far as temps go, you do realize the 65C is a safe guess at maintaining 3 years or more of use! (Dependant on VCore too.) I believe intel classifies 75c as warm, and 85c as Hot!

Uhh, let me read intels thermal design package parameters.

--Lupi
April 14, 2008 10:06:11 AM

I see you are trying to tell me I can go higher, thanks, but yes, I realize that, and I've read Intels tech papers already. It can be run higher, at the trade off of a shortened life. There's also a lot of contradicting talk on the net. So it's hard to decide just where the limit is.. But really, I just want something to spin up the fans beyond 65c+ because my system should never be above 48c given the hardware and types of software I run. Sort of a safety thing.

If it's suddenly at 65 one afternoon, something is VERY wrong. Either a fan is breaking or full of dust, or software has crashed into an infinite loop, or a monkey has crept into the room and run prime95. I know most crashes wouldn't produce much heat, but who knows. Tuniq can't raise it's own fan, so it would be a problem at a much higher over clock since it would over heat quicker. IF I leave the tuniq at full to prevent a rare over heat, then it just makes noise, wears out and collects dust all year. If I knew it could auto raise the fan, I could probably OC to 3.6 without worry... I'd just raise up the voltage, and if something got hot, it would try to cool more... But at this point, I'm working to get prime95 stable again @3.4. I think the crash problem was due to a bios glitch on vcore.. I'll know after new prime95 tests. :whistle: 

I kept seeing people worry about 71c, so that's why I wasn't happy about going over it. Even though there are other suggestions that we can go higher. - http://www.overclock.net/intel-cpus/256266-q6600-temper...
And I've read in other threads that you have had your cpus even hotter which was good to know, so that at least shows it's possible.
April 14, 2008 7:25:49 PM

LOL, well that depends! But yes, they can take a beating. I havent had a problem with any or my 8 q6x00s I have had a B3 version up to 1.81250 in the bios and booted just fine into vista @ 80something c cores. No problems! I have not placed my cooler right and booted 10 times at over 100c temps on the poor processor, maxing out at 116c.

(All it does is shut down after 10 seconds or so, so I kept re booting and finally rushed into the bios and then the hardware monitoring section. There she was, 116 C for 1 second! Then shut down!

I re adjusted things very fast!

That shows that they can take a beating, sure. But hey, in ONE year the chip will be under 75 bucks, lol! So to shorten the life span to that you'd prolly need some 80c cores for a decent amount of time and 1.5 volts in windows, etc. For A Long Time! To do damage anyways.

But who is to say? I am not a designer!

--Lupi
April 16, 2008 10:59:42 AM

LOL. That's pretty funny that you didn't realize the auto protection was shutting down at first. :lol:  I agree, you can do quite a lot to them and nothing will happen. I still worry a little about the idea of running them in the mid 70's (below where thermal protection kicks in) and up for long periods of time though. But you are experienced and probably right about it being ok. I'm probably just being overly cautious because it's a whole new system. It's kind of like a new toy, but I'm sure to do more soon.

Thanks for pointing it out they are tough. It helps to know that. I have it up to 3.4ghz stable again now. It turns out that the bios update I did messed with my voltage settings, but now it's fixed. I also did 3.5ghz and 3.6ghz last night again just for fun, but it needs more volts which I will check for soon. I did Super Pi to 1 million at 3.6 in like 13.7 secs. The difference between 3.4 3.5 or 3.6 wasn't much ( like 1 second faster) but I agree it's still fun to try. That said, I'm glad I built this system. It sure does beat the Best Buy piece of junk I tried 4 months ago with a Q6600. It had a terrible case for cooling and the north bridge was over heating. It reset its self every hour even though it only ran at 2.4ghz., LOL. I think it was a Gateway? I can't believe they can sell something like that. It pays to build it your self.

Wow, 8 q6x00's, that's a lot Lupiron! But I know you are doing research/testing which I think is great. I've read several of your threads and you have great info on over clocking. I also agree in another thread where you said Intel just makes the same part over and over (or close to it) and then scoops a few out to sell at a higher price. And of the 100,000 cpu's they sell per day , they probably don't sell many of those at the higher price, so the rest of the good chips are left for us to get, randomly. It's a crap shoot. One that you won, lol, considering your low VID chips.
April 16, 2008 4:41:50 PM

LOL, on a few! I only have one LOW q6600. 1.2000, then the rest is 1.25000 and over. And I have a semi-low q6700 1.2375. The other is 1.3250!

So i would say I have a pair of low VIDs, 3 mid VIDs and the rest upper ones. Upper ones being much more common.

But yes, its much funner when ya build it yourself. You know its done the right way!

(and you cant blame anyone else!)

And sure, as far as intel trying to make slow chips? Come on, use some common sense, lol, of course they always set out to make each and every chip the best! Think they make a 2.4, 2.66 and 2.93 at the same factory on purpose? Hello no! They always go for 3.0! And mostly make them.

Just because it cost them 10 cents to make a chip.. why not sell one for the poor people on a budget? Then one aimed at middle price, then the high end market. So they get 250/550 and 999 for them.

BUT since it costs 10 cents to make one, you make money no matter who you sell it to. Its just nice for people who know nothing about computers to buy a q6700 instead. Or if yer rich, start at the higher one for a grand!

You get three market shares off a single chip, and all make money!

--Lupi!
April 19, 2008 10:33:29 AM

Intel is quite the biz, but I agree, they try to make the same chip and some are good and some aren't... It's still great that you got 2 low vids. I decided to try one more time.

But the 3rd one I just got yesterday was another 1.3250 vid. But I gave it a good try. Now I'm going to sit back and enjoy my 1.3250. :sol:  I actually think it may be one of the better ones. It's not really too hot etc, and I reached pretty close to the top as you saw. That said I will be installing everything and start using it for real. I also feel good about it now that I know it's all tested. It just blows the best buy one out of the water. thanks again
April 19, 2008 7:45:02 PM

::chuckles.:: Yeah, Damn Intel is hip to it, I think. The box processors its easy for them to fill. So if you get another, try an OEM one.

Or waste 400 bucks for the whole cheap quad on Craigs List when ya see one! (Like an old HP or Dell or such that has a q6600 in them. The OEMs purchased a supply a LONG time ago, but are still building off them.) So that means its an un picked through q6600 and open to total random luck.

Not intel pulling low VIDs to over clock them themselves and re brand them!

Also, I took a flash drive to office depot and scanned their display models, found a pair of 1.2250 VIDs, and the last was the 1.2000 that I bought. ;) 

Just a hint!

--Lupi
April 20, 2008 10:25:35 AM

So people including Intel are picking through them before I get to them, LOL. No wonder it was hard to get one. If I try again, I will try the OEM like you said. And I think I get what you mean by the hint. I didn't know office depot sold display models, but that's a great idea. And if not the display then I can almost guess what you mean :lol:  ;)  I will keep it in mind. Thanks.
April 20, 2008 7:03:53 PM

Think of this: If you demand to buy the display model, all they can do is take the new one you didnt buy and make it the display. They usually have ZERO problems with that!

The workers got a kick out of the fact that I knew to look for other things, lol! They didnt mind in the slightest that I was checking CPU information.

They have 2 x 1.2250! Those would be an excellent OCer! But the third was 1.20000 and we know what that one will be!

Also, Craigs list... when someone is selling a whole system, just send them an e mail asking for them to turn off speed step and run core temp! (and send that to them as well. Then they tell you the VID and stepping, and you decide if its worth it!

--Lupi!
April 23, 2008 10:39:07 AM

That's true, they shouldn't have a problem with it. I was going to stop by office depot for fun, but haven't had time the last couple of days. I've had them get mad at me for putting in a cd, but it all depends on who works there. As you said, they usually don't care. . The 1.2 sounds great. Thanks again Lupi!!
April 25, 2008 9:27:10 PM

:) 
!